Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City of Pleasanton <br />Bernal Property Phase II Specific Plan EI R <br /> <br />Knoll open space must be at the Knoll; the open space along the Arroyo de la Laguna, and <br />particularly the Native American Reflective Area, represent resources unique to the site; the <br />sports fields are particularly suitable to the level areas on the Bernal property; etc.). The <br />objectives of the Specific Plan cannot be satisfied at another site: they are specific to this <br />property. Therefore, no alternative site for the Bernal Property Phase II Specific Plan is <br />evaluated. <br /> <br />Given the foregoing discussion of the process of formulating alternatives, and the content of <br />the alternatives that have emerged from the process, this chapter's focus is on Alternatives 1 <br />and 2. <br /> <br /> <br />1. Introduction <br /> <br />The Bernal Property Phase II Specific Plan, if adopted, will retain flexibility with respect to <br />land uses that will eventually be developed, within the range of the types of uses identified in <br />the Plan (and listed in Appendix B to this EIR). The flexibility is desirable in view of the fact <br />that uses needed or desired by the public will change over time. <br /> <br />The future planning process envisions three basic steps to the development of a particular use: <br /> <br />(1) Selection of project(s) through the City Council's annual priority setting <br />process, <br /> <br />(2) Preparation of a plan for that use, incorporating community input and <br />environmental analysis, and <br /> <br />(3) Consideration and approval of project(s) through the City's PUD process, <br />including land use, site layout, architecture, landscaping, etc. <br /> <br />Because PUD development plans are subject to the voter referendum process, the public <br />will ultimately have final approval authority over any site-specific project(s) that it may <br />desire. <br /> <br />The review of alternatives identified in this chapter provides a framework for the future <br />consideration of projects within the context of the Specific Plan as a whole. The evaluations <br />provided for the Plan are suggestive of areas of focus and emphasis that should be directed <br />toward future evaluations of PUD development plans for specific uses. While for many <br />topics, the project, Alternative 1, and Alternative 2 would not differ significantly in their <br />environmental outcomes, the areas of difference should guide exploration of particular <br />project elements as priorities begin to be ordered for development of particular uses. <br /> <br />166 <br />